User:Tayhughes/Evaluate an Article

Evaluate an article
This is where you will complete your article evaluation. Please use the template below to evaluate your selected article.


 * Name of article: History of art
 * I chose this article because we are studying art history in my class.

Lead

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the Lead include an introductory sentence that concisely and clearly describes the article's topic?
 * Does the Lead include a brief description of the article's major sections?
 * Does the Lead include information that is not present in the article?
 * Is the Lead concise or is it overly detailed?

Lead evaluation
The lead does a well job at introducing the overall topic of the article. It is not too detailed but it also gives enough information for the reader to have an overall idea of what they will be reading about. It also states the artciles major sections.

Content

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article's content relevant to the topic?
 * Is the content up-to-date?
 * Is there content that is missing or content that does not belong?

Content evaluation
The content is up to date and the article is relevant to the topic. There is not any content that does not belong and as far as I am aware, there is no missing content for this topic.

Tone and Balance

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article neutral?
 * Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
 * Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * Does the article attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another?

Tone and balance evaluation
This article does a well job at talking about this article in a neutral way. There are no heavily biased comments toward a particular position, no overrepresented viewpoints, and no attempts to persuade the reader to think one way or another.

Sources and References

 * Guiding questions


 * Are all facts in the article backed up by a reliable secondary source of information?
 * Are the sources thorough - i.e. Do they reflect the available literature on the topic?
 * Are the sources current?
 * Check a few links. Do they work?

Sources and references evaluation
Most of the facts in the article are backed up by a source. The sources may not be current but all of the links that i have clicked on are working. This helps me think that the information is still reliable.

Organization

 * Guiding questions


 * Is the article well-written - i.e. Is it concise, clear, and easy to read?
 * Does the article have any grammatical or spelling errors?
 * Is the article well-organized - i.e. broken down into sections that reflect the major points of the topic?

Organization evaluation
The article is well written. With art history being broad, they have it well organized by having each period its own paragraph. I did not notice any grammatical or spelling errors when I was reading.

Images and Media

 * Guiding questions


 * Does the article include images that enhance understanding of the topic?
 * Are images well-captioned?
 * Do all images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations?
 * Are the images laid out in a visually appealing way?

Images and media evaluation
With having each period throughout the history of art, it is important to see examples from each. This helps give an understanding of how things have changed, therefore the images does enhance the understanding of the topic. The images are also well captioned, giving the reader the information needed. Although, I think the images could have been laid out in a more visually pleasing way.

Checking the talk page

 * Guiding questions


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?

Talk page evaluation
There is talk about improving the structure of this pages layout and how it could become more useful. The overall rating for this page is C-class. It has been listed as a level-2 vital article in History. It is also a part of many WikiProjects. This article differs from how we talk about it in class because in class we have gone more into depth on significant images from each period.

Overall impressions

 * Guiding questions


 * What is the article's overall status?
 * What are the article's strengths?
 * How can the article be improved?
 * How would you assess the article's completeness - i.e. Is the article well-developed? Is it underdeveloped or poorly developed?

Overall evaluation
I think the article does a well job at dividing up each period throughout art history and talking about each. I think it could have given the reader more examples to refer to, giving them the ability to understand the topic a little better. I think overall, the article is well-developed but it could improve.

Optional activity

 * Choose at least 1 question relevant to the article you're evaluating and leave your evaluation on the article's Talk page. Be sure to sign your feedback

with four tildes — ~


 * Link to feedback: